Re: [PATCH 0/4] bitpos expansion summary reloaded

Tom Tromey
2012-10-22T20:45:46Z

>>>>> "Siddhesh" == Siddhesh Poyarekar <siddhesh@redhat.com> writes:

Siddhesh> Here is a fix on top of the bitpos fixes based on the warnings
Siddhesh> generated from gcc -Wconversion. I have also attached the
Siddhesh> report for review; I have not rebased since the last
Siddhesh> submission to ensure that the line numbers don't go awry. Most
Siddhesh> of the extra warnings were either unrelated or were the length
Siddhesh> parameter to (store|extract)_(un)?signed_integer functions
Siddhesh> that are safe.

Siddhesh> I have also verified that this does not cause any regressions in the
Siddhesh> testsuite and that the gcc warnings generated after this were safe.

IIUC, this patch fixes some subset of -Wconversion warnings but leaves
the rest untouched.

Would it be very hard or ugly if we just tried to fix them all, and then
enabled -Wconversion in configure? Aside from maybe some code ugliness,
I wonder what the downsides would be.

The reason I ask is that I'm concerned about our ability to maintain
this change properly, and I wonder if this would be a cheap way to
handle the more mechanical aspects.

Tom